Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to EQ-5D-3L in the Thai diabetes patients

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Pattanaphesaj, Juntana ^a,b   Thavorncharoensap, Montarat ^a,b  

^a MAHIDOL UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

^b Department of Health Ministry of Public Health   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Diabetic; EQ 5D 3L; EQ 5D 5L; Health related quality of life; Measurement properties; Psychometrics

Indexed keywords

INSULIN;

ADULT; ANXIETY; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVERGENT VALIDITY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DEPRESSION; DIABETES MELLITUS; DIABETIC PATIENT; DISCRIMINATIVE POWER; EQ 5D 3L; EQ 5D 5L; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; INSULIN TREATMENT; KAPPA STATISTICS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; MIDDLE AGED; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; PAIN; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PHYSICAL PARAMETERS; QUALITY OF LIFE INDEX; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SELF CARE; SHORT FORM 36; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; THAI (PEOPLE); ASIAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEVICES; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; THAILAND;

ADULT; ASIAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; DIABETES MELLITUS; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT PREFERENCE; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; THAILAND;

EID: 84924114930     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14777525     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12955-014-0203-3     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Williams A. The EuroQol instrument. In: KIND P, BROOKS R, RABIN R, editors. EQ-5D concepts and methods: a developmental history. Dordrecht: Springer; 2005. p. 1-17.
2. Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001;33:337-43.
3. Rawlins MD, Culyer AJ. National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments. BMJ. 2004;329:224-7.
4. Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB. Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1253-8.
5. Sakthong P. Measurement of clinical-effect: utility. J Med Assoc Thai. 2008;91 Suppl 2:S43-52.
6. EQ-5D-3L. [ http://www.euroqol.org/eq-5d-products/eq-5d-3l.html ]
7. Brazier J, Jones N, Kind P. Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire. Qual Life Res. 1993;2:169-80.
8. Johnson JA, Coons SJ. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Qual Life Res. 1998;7:155-66.
9. Sullivan PW, Lawrence WF, Ghushchyan V. A national catalog of preference-based scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med Care. 2005;43:736-49.
10. Badia X, Schiaffino A, Alonso J, Herdman M. Using the EuroQoI 5-D in the Catalan general population: feasibility and construct validity. Qual Life Res. 1998;7:311-22.
11. Kaarlola A, Pettila V, Kekki P. Performance of two measures of general health-related quality of life, the EQ-5D and the RAND-36 among critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30:2245-52.
12. Houle C, Berthelot J-M. A Head-to-Head Comparison of the Health Utilities Mark 3 and the EQ-5D for the Population Living in Private Households in Canada. Qual Life Newsletter. 2000;24:5-6.
13. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20:1727-36.
14. Oemar M, Janssen B. EQ-5D-5L user guide. Rotterdam: EuroQol Group; 2013.
15. Janssen MF, Birnie E, Haagsma JA, Bonsel GJ. Comparing the standard EQ-5D three-level system with a five-level version. Value Health. 2008;11:275-84.
16. Pickard AS, De Leon MC, Kohlmann T, Cella D, Rosenbloom S. Psychometric comparison of the standard EQ-5D to a 5 level version in cancer patients. Med Care. 2007;45:259-63.
17. EQ-5D-5L. [ http://www.euroqol.org/eq-5d-products/eq-5d-5l.html ]
18. Janssen MF, Pickard AS, Golicki D, Gudex C, Niewada M, Scalone L, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res. 2013;22:1717-27.
19. Craig BM, Pickard AS, Lubetkin EI. Health problems are more common, but less severe when measured using newer EQ-5D versions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67:93-9.
20. Scalone L, Ciampichini R, Fagiuoli S, Gardini I, Fusco F, Gaeta L, et al. Comparing the performance of the standard EQ-5D 3L with the new version EQ-5D 5L in patients with chronic hepatic diseases. Qual Life Res. 2013;22:1707-16.
21. Kim SH, Kim HJ, Lee SI, Jo MW. Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in cancer patients in Korea. Qual Life Res. 2012;21:1065-73.
22. Tran BX, Ohinmaa A, Nguyen LT. Quality of life profile and psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in HIV/AIDS patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:132.
23. Kim TH, Jo MW, Lee SI, Kim SH, Chung SM. Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in the general population of South Korea. Qual Life Res. 2013;22:2245-53.
24. Jia YX, Cui FQ, Li L, Zhang DL, Zhang GM, Wang FZ, et al. Comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in patients with hepatitis B. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:2355-63.
25. Cabasés JM, Errea M, Hernández-Arenaz I. Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L between mental and somatic chronic patients populations. Spain: Department of Economics, Public University of Navarra; 2013.
26. van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012;15:708-15.
27. Tongsiri S, Cairns J. Estimating population-based values for EQ-5D health states in Thailand. Value Health. 2011;14:1142-5.
28. Kimman M, Vathesatogkit P, Woodward M, Tai ES, Thumboo J, Yamwong S, et al. Validity of the Thai EQ-5D in an occupational population in Thailand. Qual Life Res. 2013;22:1499-506.
29. Leurmarnkul W, Meetam P. Properties testing of the retranslated SF-36 (Thai version). Thai J Pharm Sci. 2005;29:69-88.
30. Lim LL, Seubsman SA, Sleigh A. Thai SF-36 health survey: tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, reliability and validity in healthy men and women. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:52.
31. Ware Jr JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473-83.
32. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Jaeschke R. How to develop and validate a new quality of life instrument. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1995. p. 49-56.
33. Bas Janssen MF, Birnie E, Bonsel GJ. Evaluating the discriminatory power of EQ-5D, HUI2 and HUI3 in a US general population survey using Shannon's indices. Qual Life Res. 2007;16:895-904.
34. Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC. The measurement of interrater agreement. In: Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2004.
35. Laver-Fawcett A. Principles of assessment and outcome measurement for occupational therapists and physiotherapists: theory, skills and application. London: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.; 2007.
36. Kottner J, Audige L, Brorson S, Donner A, Gajewski BJ, Hrobjartsson A, et al. Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:96-106.
37. Rubin RR, Peyrot M. Quality of life and diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 1999;15:205-18.
38. Jacobson AM, Groot MD, Samson JA. The evaluation of two measures of quality of life in patients with type I and type II diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1994;17:267-74.
39. Bundhamcharoen K, Odton P, Phulkerd S, Tangcharoensathien V. Burden of disease in Thailand: changes in health gap between 1999 and 2004. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:53.
40. Sakthong P, Charoenvisuthiwongs R, Shabunthom R. A comparison of EQ-5D index scores using the UK, US, and Japan preference weights in a Thai sample with type 2 diabetes. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:71.